Crash Landing in London Heathrow | British Airways Flight 38 

Typically, the ignorant press reinforce the general public's belief that first officers are not 'proper' pilots.

Unsurprising really. The press in this country is awful; they write stories that makes their readership as angry as possible. The Daily Mail for example has cultivated many witch-hunts against people who have later been exonorated.

Good ole corporate aviation

Most are, and in this profession, you are 'guilty' until proven 'innocent', unfortunately, with most not here to defend themselves ;)

@@scaramonga Isn't that the sad truth, it's all in personality as well. Had I been the Captain, and I knew I did everything to the best of my ability I would not give to craps what someone else thought, but I know not everyone can have thick skin and it must be hard when your colleagues blame you.

@@brotakig1531 Yes indeed. One only has to turn back to 'Sully', the 'Miracle on the Hudson' incident, where outstanding professionalism and great pilots, teamwork, and just utter brilliance, and luck, shows the metal of these men and women who fly us all every day, and despite said incident, they were determined to lay the blame @ Sully & co-pilot, before one knew the facts. It is a sad truth, but also a result of big corporations not wanting to lose big bucks, and are prepared for even the most skilled to take the rap in doing so, no matter what the outcome may be. Now if one ain't here, one cant defend oneself, and this makes it a lot easier to blame those who ain't ;)

Pilots are ALWAYS called guilty of something, in order clear or at least to minimize the faults of the manufacturers, the airlines and aviation authorities.

Correct, I think. Thanks!

Thank you! Yes, it's sad. Every pilot who finds himself in a crash but survives is grounded (see sully for example). Most really wait anxiously for the final report to tell the world that they did the best they could. In the meantime, the aircraft manufacturer and the airline often try to blame the pilot, because it's the easy way out for them. To me, it sounds like "guilty until proven otherwise" - which is quite terrible.

He wasn’t blamed.

You know things like that is the reason the Us had 7/4/1776

@@dknowles60 what? same thing happened to sully (from the us) so its not a British thing

I always wanted to be a Pilot until I realized how bad vertigo can be on a Pilot that didn't know they had it. I know I have it so best bet is to not put people in that situation. but I watch the same channels as you, these guys really are informative and it makes me love aviation even more.

Care to share those "other channels"?

huh, see! :)

Like driving down a hill at idle to trying not to annoy the neighbours, and then releasing you're unable to accelerate when the hill levels out.

I like both planes roughly equally, but Airbus is a bit better IMO, since they don't put random parts inside the fuel tanks, and didn't make the 737 Max. Airbus > Boeing

@@thatguyalex2835 😅

Thank you :) Yes indeed, it always seems like "guilty until proven otherwise" to me...

That’s absolute nonsense. They had a fault that stopped them getting approach thrust. The pilots were in no way at fault. You’re just trolling because you little better to do.

@@peteconrad2077 if you’re hunting for trolls, try a mirror. The crash was January 2008, the NTSB report came out in Feb 2010. In Feb 2008, mechanical defects and bird ingestion were ruled out, as was fuel contamination. By May, they’d ruled out further things. Late 2008 had the first of 2 similar incidents, but it took months to link it and even when it happened it was too late to save the pilot from rumors. By May 2008, one of the facts supporting those rumors is ‘there was nothing wrong with the plane’. He flew a “good plane” into the ground… “must be pilot error,” even if they can’t point to the mistake he made. I’m not saying it’s proper, just saying it’s how people are, especially in groups. It’s not nice, it’s not right, but it’s people being people. There is a book out there - ‘Thirty Seconds to Impact’ written by the pilot, where he speaks of how British Airways treated him after the accident. Might be worth a read. Might not - trolls arn’t big on understanding subtlety.

@@Relkond I’ve read it and I know the pilot personally. He was never blamed for it. Troll on.

@@peteconrad2077 So he wasn’t pensively waiting for the investigators to find the fault that crashed the plane? And he had no issues with BA? Huh.

@@Relkond that’s not what I said, troll.

thank you!

oh really? Can I look that up somewhere? Never heard about that

@@AirspaceVideos my apologies, it's actually the other way round! I had in my mind a picture of an animation of the pipe's being different sizes. But nope, they made the pipes flush with the top surface so ice can't adhere to anything (which makes much more sense). I believe you covered that in a video a while ago!

It was all over the TV and news papers

yeah that's a weird bug by the fllight sim 😄

Thanks for the video Airspace ,you did such a great job .

It's called "There's something in the air" (how fitting) by Michael Rothery. I use it off epidemicsound. And - thanks :)

This is easily disproven - the fuel was still in the tanks when investigators arrived.

It’s absolute nonsense. The investigation would have easily uncovered this.

They went into the hold for ten minutes, why would you hold if you didn’t have enough fuel?

because Rolls Royce is not a good jet engine

Why? Haven’t they already been through enough?

It's been a while since I had meteo class, but I'll try: Temperature falls quite linearly as a relation to feets of altitude. The higher you go, the colder it gets. That holds true until your hit the tropopause, where the temperature will no longer fall but remain constant until you hit the next layer above (stratosphere I believe). At the equator, the tropopause can be as high as 60'000ft, as opposed to only 20'000ft at the poles. This is due to multiple reasons: The equator is warmer, and earth is wider here, so the force of gravity is less here. The centrifugal force caused by earth's rotation also helps to "stretch the atmosphere" to higher altitudes. So: Higher tropopause = temperature can go lower because you can go higher, and for every 1000ft you climb, the colder it gets. If someone with a meteorology degree wants to correct mey feel free 😄

@@AirspaceVideos wow that's fascinating! I appreciate the detailed answer by the way:)

@@tobiasschmalzer4417 Yep, I was gonna say the same thing. At temperate latitudes (45 deg N, or 45 deg S), the stratosphere begins at ~36,000 ft, so the temperature gets down to -70 F, and no colder. For equatorial latitudes, if the plane has a maximum cruising altitude of 41,000 ft, the temperature can dip below -85 F. This also depends on the air currents, cos temperature can drop below -90 F in certain instances.

Hmm I am no boeing pilot, but I've never heard of such a switch. I really can't think of what they could have meant, sorry!

@@AirspaceVideos Thank you anyway 😊 Should I come across that info again, I'll write it here.

I haven’t seen that. I have access to the FCOM and there’s nothing like it mentioned.

@@peteconrad2077 Is is possible to ping Mentour Pilot in this thread? He flies the 737 so he should know?

@@pissant145 I have a friend who’s a 777 skipper. I’ll ask him and get back to you.

true

It is now

@@kickedinthecalfbyacow7549 Nope. Thanks to Brexit, quite possibly never again.

Heathrow is currently the busiest airport in Europe

Au contraire mon ami ! The Captain let the FO (there are NO 'co-pilots' it's an old term and highly inaccurate) fly the plane i.e. AVIATE so that he could concentrate on whatever problem solving was possible. You don't concern yourself with clerical work when the plane's at risk !

@@grahamstevenson1740 The guy sitting on the right is the copilot and the women serving food are stewardesses. So please, stop it!!!

@@robert_costello Your thinking is about 30 years out of date. There are TWO PILOTS. The PILOT FLYING and The PILOT MONITORING Either the Captain OR the First Officer can do either task. They confer and decide who will do which task for the majority of whatever phase of flight. If either sees a problem of any description where they feel the need to assume command, they can do so and will say "MY PLANE" or similar. There is no longer the strict hierarchy of many decades ago. Stop referring to 'co-pilots'. THERE ARE NONE !

I said that was what the rumors stated. I do not agree with them at all.

@@grahamstevenson1740 I noticed you didn’t see anything about the flight attendance 😂

He says “on” January… not “in” like he does in the other video where you left a similar comment. Can you not think of something original for each video? Or are you just unwilling to put that much effort forth to pick on people for absolutely no reason?

What cavitation marks are you referring to? This was an icing problem (which could be reporduced in a lab). Check the final report for more details.

@@AirspaceVideos Hello Airspace! Thanks a lot for producing these high quality videos! I am referring to the cavitation marks on the high pressure pump. The investigators found that the high pressure pump has some unusual signs of wear, and they sent it to the manufacturer for consultation. They in turn concluded that this is caused by cavitation, suggesting that there was under-pressure in the HP pump. This would be caused by low pressure in the fuel upstream of the HP pump, and that's what brought them to the fuel oil heat exchanger. They found that icing can occur inside of the fuel line, and when released it would obstruct the FOHE resulting in insufficient flow to the HP pump. My question is: shouldn't build-up of ice inside the fuel line be considered the main issue here? Altering the FOHE seems to be kind of preventative measure rather than addressing the larger issue of ice build-up. I have also read a comment on another online forum suggesting that the ratio of water/fuel used in the lab tests did not reflect the concentration of water/fuel resulting in the accident. And also, they did not report whether cavitation was found in a similar case of reduced power in another aircraft which was travelling at unusually low temperatures. To me, this suggests that really just wanted to wrap up the investigation at that point, and pin the blame on some easy-to-fix system. But what do I know? :o)

Hmm a very interesting point there. Maybe fixing the FOHE was just the easiest thing to do? I really don't know, though!

They did

More than 25 would have taken them into the back of the curve. One stage was just right.

No one died

Yup. And I bet there are a lot more of us Americans watching this channel than people from the UK….. just because of statistical likelihood. Maybe we could call it “Tankstelle”. The word doesn’t mention gas, petrol, or Benzin. It’s just a fill ‘er up place! 😉